socket.c:4524: unexpected error:

[Ram Akuka]

Hi,
my system is Debian Etch 32Bit running kernel version 2.6.18
uname  -a
Linux 2.6.18-6-686 #1 SMP Tue Jun 17 21:31:27 UTC 2008 i686 GNU/Linux.
i looked at my old version (9.4.3) Bind and saw the same error but
since i upgrade i have the filling i seeing this error more often.
this is the log from my DNS server :

18-Aug-2009 21:25:04.722 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
18-Aug-2009 21:25:04.722 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
21-Aug-2009 01:10:15.121 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
21-Aug-2009 01:10:15.121 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
23-Aug-2009 19:16:00.908 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
23-Aug-2009 19:16:00.908 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
24-Aug-2009 18:02:57.468 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
24-Aug-2009 18:02:57.468 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
24-Aug-2009 20:26:38.731 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
24-Aug-2009 20:26:38.731 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
28-Aug-2009 02:01:48.842 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
28-Aug-2009 02:01:48.842 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
28-Aug-2009 15:12:37.524 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
28-Aug-2009 15:12:37.524 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
29-Aug-2009 12:57:30.851 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
29-Aug-2009 12:57:30.851 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
29-Aug-2009 12:57:31.244 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
29-Aug-2009 12:57:31.244 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
29-Aug-2009 23:14:47.951 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
29-Aug-2009 23:14:47.951 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
29-Aug-2009 23:14:51.792 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
29-Aug-2009 23:14:51.792 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
30-Aug-2009 16:30:37.384 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
30-Aug-2009 16:30:37.384 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
30-Aug-2009 20:37:18.701 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
30-Aug-2009 20:37:18.701 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
31-Aug-2009 14:37:02.042 general: info: zone 018.net.il/IN: loaded
serial 2009083100
31-Aug-2009 17:28:09.361 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
31-Aug-2009 17:28:09.361 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
31-Aug-2009 18:15:01.752 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
31-Aug-2009 18:15:01.752 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
01-Sep-2009 19:48:08.164 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
01-Sep-2009 19:48:08.164 general: error: 22/Invalid argument


should i have to worry about this or can i just disregard this errors?

BTW
if there's any way i can help to debug this problem i will be more
then happy to assist here.

thanks in advance,

Ram


2009/8/31 JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei at isc.org>:
> At Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:01:08 +0300,
> Ram Akuka <ramakuka at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> recently i upgraded my DNS  to 9.4.3P3 (from 9.4.3).
>> since then i can see the below error more often:
>> 30-Aug-2009 02:27:24.925 general: error: socket.c:4524: unexpected error:
>> 30-Aug-2009 02:27:24.925 general: error: 22/Invalid argument
>> i can see there's an open bug on this issue -
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/bind-users@lists.isc.org/msg03339.html,
>> but i can't understand what's the effects of this bug.
>> is there any way i can help solve this bug? can i know how this
>> effects my service . should i expect some service interruption or
>> anything like that ?
>> should i consider downgrade to 9.4.2P2?
>
> First off, please identify the operating system and its version.  This
> kind of thing can be highly dependent on OS-level details.
>
> Secondly, I suspect it's less likely that the difference from 9.4.3
> and 9.4.3-P3 suddenly causes this failure.  If you really see more of
> this after upgrading to 9.4.3-P3 from 9.4.3, I guess it's more likely
> because (e.g.) a change of query pattern.  Or do you mean you upgraded
> from 9.4.2-P2 to 9.4.3-P3?
>
> Also, how often did it happen?  While it's an unexpected error in this
> context, a system call (connect(2) in this case) can fail for any
> reason and the other part of named has some level of resilience to
> such cases.  So, unless it's very frequent you may be able to ignore
> the warnings safely in practice.
>
> ---
> JINMEI, Tatuya
> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
>